Whoever wins, whether BMP-3,FICV or a horse-driven chariot with composite armor plating around the horse: please for the love of god do not give to the OFB to produce!

That wont happen because OFB is the biggest lobby in GOI and FICV can guarantee them steady work for its workforce for the next 2-3 decades irrespective which design gets selected.

The Tatas , Mahindra can still make car bus and tractor and survive even if they loose FICV but for OFB it would be bread and butter and they would pull every string in the GOI to get this not to mention the GOI would itself be inclined to grant them the same.

The best option is to reform OFB as much as one wants to wish away by jumping into Pvt Sector for all ills that ails OFB this organisation is here to stay for long so if not today then some other day you will have to reform them. FICV might just be an opportunity to cut the extra flab and make them more efficient.

^^^Austin ji, reforming the OFB is the most difficult thing to do, enough vested interest all around to not let that happen.. Grantint FICV to a pvt player will be easier.. Incidentally OF Medak is one of the better run OFB... The one in UP and WB are the worst lot.

Guys, it was propose at the time of launchig FICV that ,the winner of the compitition could use the production facility per existing at OFB Medak. Instead of building a brand new production line. So regardless of what brfites want the OFB will get a large slice of the pie. The only choice that was real was that we would have build up the indian design and development capability. With the BMP 3, we will have lost the opportunity to do so as well.

^^^Austin ji, reforming the OFB is the most difficult thing to do, enough vested interest all around to not let that happen.. Grantint FICV to a pvt player will be easier.. Incidentally OF Medak is one of the better run OFB... The one in UP and WB are the worst lot.

There are vested interest every where even in Pvt Sector , havent you seen how Pvt Players RIP off Pentagon year after year with exotic money paid to them.

Not reforming OFB is shying away from problem , Closing your eyes and pretending the problem will go away.

What about other programs or projects that OFB handles what about FMBT program , eventually the problem still remains even if you hand Pvt players some project it wont reform OFB.

Mahindra and TATA would start doing exactly what other good private players eventually do start ripping MOD and show year on year profit for their investors ...its not a crime but thats the way Pvt players work.

I believe Public Sector in Defence has huge potential which are grossly underutilised and underestimated and reforming it is the only way forward , Much like GOI has reformed other public sectors they can do the same with OFB even if it takes a decade it better to reform them rather then pretend involving private players will solve all problem with OFB , not that i am against Pvt players but its best utilised for specific programs.

^^^Austin ji, reforming the OFB is the most difficult thing to do, enough vested interest all around to not let that happen.. Grantint FICV to a pvt player will be easier.. Incidentally OF Medak is one of the better run OFB... The one in UP and WB are the worst lot.

There are vested interest every where even in Pvt Sector , havent you seen how Pvt Players RIP off Pentagon year after year with exotic money paid to them..

Austin-ji; I fully agree that Pvt players are not a silver bullet, and reforming OFBs is a critical need which is not going to go away -- in fact I am sure you have heard me say the same multiple times.

But at least for FICV, I hope that OFBs dont get it, why? OFBs need to have the fear of god put into them, and pvt industry making a foothold will be one sure fire way. It worked for BSNL etc substantially.

Also we want capacity addition in every way, both through OFB improvement AND pvt sector, this is not either or condition, FICV is one of the easiest way to get the Pvt industry to cut its teeth in the Mil space.

Not to mention of course that the overall confidence that M&M will have timely quality delivery meeting the needs is much higher as things stand now.

MK-II variant of Main Battle Tank (MBT) Arjun has entered into the user trial phase and DRDO is looking at the Futuristic Main Battle Tank (FMBT) project aimed at reducing the weight of the battle tanks, said DRDO chief V K Saraswat, who was in the city to attend the valedictory function of Post Induction Training School (POINTS) - 17 at the Defence Institute of Advanced Technology (DIAT) at Girinagar in Khadakwasla.

Talking to the reporters Saraswat said, “The trials of MK-II variant MBT Arjun are expected to be complete within a year after which we will be in a position to produce 300 to 400 units for the Army.” On being asked about FMBT he said, “The idea is to reduce the weight of the tank. Developed nations such as the United States of America and Israel have been working on reducing the weights of battle tanks. Heavy weights of tanks affect their maneuverability. We are therefore looking to reduce the weight of FMBT to 50 tonnes each.”

Commenting on the Indian Operating System (OS), Saraswat said that Indian OS is relevant in the time of cyber warfare and the DRDO has set a time-frame of three years for the project to materialise. About 250 outstanding senior faculty members from important Institutions such as IITs, IISc, NITs, DIAT and other institutes of national importance along with scientist faculties from various DRDO labs/establishments and Armed Forces have delivered customised lectures during this POINTS - 17 programme, a press release issued by Press Information Bureau said.

there is a version called CV-90-120 that perhaps qualifies as a light tank of around 35-40t. the polish Anders might have such a ver as well. but I doubt these can mount the new gen higher pressure L55 cannons. no doubt they will provide firepower and mobility, but in protection , unless I am mistaken nobody has found a way to give a 40t tank mounting a 120mm gun sized turret the same protection level as a 65t tank mounting the same.http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/dat ... _120-T.JPG

it can at best be used in the areas where bigger tanks cannot operate and as light "raider tanks" in concert with recce vehicles (fennec) and IFVs (the base cv90, puma types)...

mmm.. while many are contemplating on removing this evil, you want to make it as the core principle. thalia!

Contemplate all you want - we are deeply corrupt. So not taking this factor into a design strategy and then crying foul is hypocritical. We must acknowledge our ills and either have a national way forward on corruption or swim in it.

If DRDO had a Russian marketing front, they could have sold a 1000 Arjuns to IA.

Basically DRDO succumbed to the pressure and is now going on a wild goose chase and squander public money over this 50 ton FMBT nonsense. If there was the mildest courage - DRDO should have washed its hands off, closed down the armor research and let the guys go - saving them heartburn. In fact i hope there is a wholesale exodus - too long they have wasted their time on this nonsense

just saw that pic in a un named blog. if its anywhere other there, could it be linked from here by a kind soul?

they should add more spaced armour panels on the turret sides rather than just add "tool boxes" there. maybe a heavy composite armour panel on outside of the "tool box" , then a gap of few inches, then then internal turrent armour visible at present. if the turret is rotated to one side to engage a tank, the sides will be exposed from other side and a shell could hurt it bad there

just saw that pic in a un named blog. if its anywhere other there, could it be linked from here by a kind soul?

they should add more spaced armour panels on the turret sides rather than just add "tool boxes" there. maybe a heavy composite armour panel on outside of the "tool box" , then a gap of few inches, then then internal turrent armour visible at present. if the turret is rotated to one side to engage a tank, the sides will be exposed from other side and a shell could hurt it bad there

it looks like a challenger tank now.

Supposedly its not the Mk II? Its an early design variant from the 1980s?

I am mystified why they went from a better looking and better protected proto with higher gunner sight to the current one which lacks sloping fwd armour in mk1?

I am not disputing its a old pic...just trying to figure out the why of it...did we ever talk to the british for a chieftain mki as the starting basis of arjun. Iran shah regime was also doing some mbt stuff with the brits.

just saw that pic in a un named blog. if its anywhere other there, could it be linked from here by a kind soul?

they should add more spaced armour panels on the turret sides rather than just add "tool boxes" there. maybe a heavy composite armour panel on outside of the "tool box" , then a gap of few inches, then then internal turrent armour visible at present. if the turret is rotated to one side to engage a tank, the sides will be exposed from other side and a shell could hurt it bad there

it looks like a challenger tank now.

Supposedly its not the Mk II? Its an early design variant from the 1980s?

Can't be. My careful analysis indicates that the tank in the picture has a sloped turret. DRDO does not have the sense to design sloped turrets. Therefore the tank is not an Arjun prototype. It's probably another wet dream that won't be ready for delivery until the next century

It could be mean that according to DRDO studies, Kanchan worked better with boxy turrets (like current Arjun, Leopard 2A4) than sloped turrets. A bit surprising as the initial tanks to use composite armor were Abrahams and Chally 1 (both used Chobham with mildly sloped turrets).

Also the sloped Arjun prototype turret has a fair resemblance with the turret of Challenger 1.

looking at the ajai shukla pic, the sides of turret have become sloped now and the two tool boxes that used to be there moved to rear corner of turret using that grid frame. this would indicate the turret sides have gained additional sloped armour ...